Paul Taylor
Systems and MI Manager at The Growth Company
Last activity
Member since
Votes
0
Subscriptions
44
Replies
Paul Taylor commented,
Paul Taylor commented,
Hi Sam I don't think that is right. The information in the QAR specification is pretty clear on this. In the example of learner going on a break in July 24 they have until July 25 to return. A restart in August 25 would not meet the criteria below. Overdue planned breaks We also treat learning aims as withdrawals in the QAR methodology where they have a Completion status of 6 (‘Learner has temporarily withdrawn from the aim due to an agreed break in learning’) and where either: they do not have a corresponding restart record in the same funding year they do not have a corresponding restart record or continuation of break record in the following funding year.
Hi Sam I don't think that is right. The information in the QAR specification is pretty clear on this. In the example of learner going on a break in July 24 they have until July 25 to return. A rest...
Paul Taylor commented,
Hi Carrie Yes, I think that is correct. I'm assuming if you had her in R12 that she would also been in R14 as a break.as well.
Hi Carrie Yes, I think that is correct. I'm assuming if you had her in R12 that she would also been in R14 as a break.as well.
Paul Taylor commented,
Hi I think the QAR is correct. The DFE note is clumsy but says that they have excluded prior year data from the final extract, and not from the calculation so the 24/25 calc should be as per the spec which is what we are seeing. It would be madness not to have done this. We have also noticed the inconsistency with standard names. Looks lake a poor reporting process to me where they have merged the description from whichever year a leaver was reported in. This means that any standard names that have changed may be duplicated. Use the standard code if you are cross referencing to internal data. Overdue breaks are often the explanation of where data differs. If you have changed a break from last year into a leaver this year then that is likely to show in a future year depending on planned end date. There is an explanation in the spec but you'll need all of your fingers to work it out.
Hi I think the QAR is correct. The DFE note is clumsy but says that they have excluded prior year data from the final extract, and not from the calculation so the 24/25 calc should be as per the sp...
Paul Taylor commented,
Paul Taylor commented,
I don't think that is any change from the current process. If a learner is on a break in learning in 23/24, then that break in learning continues to be submitted in corresponding years until either the learner returns and restarts their learning, or you report the learner as having withdrawn . If the learner has not returned by R14 24/25 then this will be counted as a withdrawal in the QAR. Where a learner is retrospectively changed from a break to a withdrawal in 24/25 but with a 23/24 learning end date, then this learner stops being included in the ILR return. In this instance learners get added into the QAR as withdrawal and labelled as an overdue break in learning and added to hybrid end year based on planned end / actual end +1 year. My reading of that is that, aside from the R04 change, this is the same as it was previously but interested to see what the combined response is from the service desk is.
I don't think that is any change from the current process. If a learner is on a break in learning in 23/24, then that break in learning continues to be submitted in corresponding years until eithe...
Paul Taylor commented,
My reading of this Steve is that the process is as it was but you just have 4 months less to return. If you are a BiL then you have up to the end of the following academic year to return in order to not be counted as a leaver in the QAR. The difference is that you no longer get the first 4 months of the 3rd academic year to return in now that they are no longer using the R04. The process was already inequitable in that a learner going on a break in July would have 16 months to return (now 12) whereas an August break had 28 months (now 24). Obviously most breaks are shorter than a year but suspect there will be some small impact on headline achievement rates as a consequence of this.
My reading of this Steve is that the process is as it was but you just have 4 months less to return. If you are a BiL then you have up to the end of the following academic year to return in order t...
Paul Taylor commented,
Hi Sarah Yes you are right on this. A change in the methodology means that you now have 4 months less for learners to return from a break and them not to be counted as a penalty leaver within the QAR. I assume (and we know the folly of assumptions) is that the DfE have looked at the proportion of learners who come back in that window and have decided that this would not make a significant difference to achievement rates. Thanks Paul
Hi Sarah Yes you are right on this. A change in the methodology means that you now have 4 months less for learners to return from a break and them not to be counted as a penalty leaver within the Q...
Paul Taylor commented,
I think one of the things that we have to accept with devolution is that that DAs are increasingly prescribing what they want to purchase in terms of the courses being delivered/offered. DAs should have a good understanding of what the local economy / population need in terms of upskilling and they will commission on that basis. There will be some issues like this where individual / micro-regional needs are not met but the pressure on budget also means that they will have to prioritise. I get that is not ideal for the individual in this case but that is the direction of travel.
I think one of the things that we have to accept with devolution is that that DAs are increasingly prescribing what they want to purchase in terms of the courses being delivered/offered. DAs should...
Paul Taylor commented,
Hi Simon I think that neither will fund this. The DfE funding rules state that funding eligibility is only for individuals that are resident of non-devolved areas. Devolved authorities procure delivery from providers and colleges through a commissioning process and if you do not have a contract for services as a raining provider or a grant for colleges and other grant funded institutions then they will not be funded through that DA. I think that the expectation would be that you would refer the individual to someone within that Devolved Authority who can offer the course or signpost to the DA.
Hi Simon I think that neither will fund this. The DfE funding rules state that funding eligibility is only for individuals that are resident of non-devolved areas. Devolved authorities procure deli...